Eunice Kennedy Shriver remembered for defense of unborn

http://www.nytimes.com/1990/05/13/opinion/l-jfk-would-have-defended-bis… J.F.K. Would Have Defended Bishops’ Right to Fight Abortion

To the Editor:

I read with indignation the use of a quote from my brother, President John F. Kennedy, in an advertisement placed by the National Abortion Rights Action League (The Week in Review, April 22) to defend its position on unlimited rights to abortion and, at the same time, to attack the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, which has contracted with the Hill and Knowlton agency to mount a public education campaign defending the fetus. It is difficult to understand why anyone would seek to deprive the bishops of the same right the National Abortion Rights Action League and every other American citizen possesses.

President Kennedy issued the quoted statement to assure Americans that ”no religious body … would impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace.” The use of the quote in the context of the advertisement is outrageous, unfair, inaccurate and a distortion both of my brother’s remarks and of the Catholic bishops’ full acceptance of the separation of church and state. The ”central question” posed by the advertisement is, ”Who Decides for America?” The obvious answer is that we all do. This effort by the abortion rights league to raise money by attacking the bishops sets group against group, religion against religion, to the detriment of everyone.

The debate over the abortion issue should take place on higher ground. The real purpose of the statement by President Kennedy was to strike from public discourse precisely the kind of religious bigotry represented by the advertisement.

One of the bills my brother was proudest of established the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. He wanted this institute to study problems of pregnancy and early childhood development so that infants who were lost because of birth problems and lack of research on fetal life could survive. So his interest in the fetus and in children was positive and comprehensive, reflecting his moral values. Do we not understand that religious beliefs and moral values are not the same?

The right to life of a newly conceived fetus is a value held by many people who are not Catholic. This is a moral value that deserves debate, and the bishops have a right to advance this view in all of the channels of communication that are available.

I would similarly defend the rights of the abortion rights league to advance its views in these same channels. Why then do such groups object so violently when church leaders organize to communicate their values of respect for human life from its inception? This is not religious doctrine like a belief in the virgin birth, or even the sacredness of Jesus.

President Kennedy believed and practiced the value that America should offer a free marketplace for all views, even those of Catholic bishops. He would have resented his words being distorted to confuse and obscure that value. His family resents it, too.

EUNICE KENNEDY SHRIVER

Executive Vice President

Joseph P. Kennedy Jr. Foundation

Washington, May 8, 1990

Her husband was the last Dem on the national ticket (1972 as VP) who was pro-life!